Just when the economy is bouncing back nicely

[Hutzpa]

the war hawks have to go and create another war. Why do these people hate America so much?

[Hutzpa]

2. The American economy

it's nothing to write home about, but it has been a bit stable won't you agree?

[Kelvin Mace]

5. If you happen to actually have a job

paying a living wage, with decent insurance and other benefits, things are swimming. For the other 80% of the nation, not so much.

[Marrah_G]

13. not really....unless you already have money.

[TBF]

15. For the 1% it's great. Thanks for your concern. nt

[Kelvin Mace]

3. I hardly call staggering around like a zombie

"bouncing back nicely"

Though I agree that another war is not going to help matters.

[Hutzpa]

8. A view on a stable economy is always going to be based on one's

location, but as you've rightly stated another war is not going to help the economy which is what this thread is all about.

[Hutzpa]

16. INSISTING we needed to go to war??

where? when? I heard Obama talked about taking the fight to ISIS nothing about putting boots on the ground.

[hobbit709]

6. Like a dead cat bounce.

[Kelvin Mace]

7. A ghoulisly vivid, but accurate image

[Hutzpa]

11. I take it you'll rather us go to war than see the economy

improve, right?

[hobbit709]

14. Absolutely no and it has nothing to do with the issue of the economy allegedly doing well.

For the 99% the economy pretty much sucks. The only ones that have been doing well in this "rebound' are the 1%.

[jwirr]

9. Somehow the MIC does not feel responsible for the well being of the USA - only for themselves and

their corporations. They need to read "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" by Paul Kennedy. It is military overstretch that destroyed all of the empires documented. They are going to destroy us.

[Marrah_G]

12. it's bouncing back? for who?

[Dreamer Tatum]

18. Would you include the President in the war hawks? nt

[Hutzpa]

19. As part of the war hawks.. no

nt

[Dreamer Tatum]

20. I see.

So...no war happens without his say so...no bombings would have occurred without his authorization...
Congress wasn't consulted, nor was the UN...but noooooooooo. The President isn't a war hawk. He just
unilaterally authorized bombings.

[Hutzpa]

21. That's all rhetorical mumble jumble

what would you have rather the President done? I hope you're not suggesting he sits back while American heads are being cut off.

[Dreamer Tatum]

22. So you wanted him to bomb ISIS and bomb them real good

but he is in no way a war hawk.

What, then, are you talking about, exactly? If his actions aren't hawkish, and if he's the only one who can authorize strikes, then what is your actual concern?

[woo me with science]

23. LOL. So the economy is "bouncing back nicely" and the president has *nothing* to do

with the bombings HE unilaterally authorizes!


Where have we heard these things before?!

Trashing thread, but noting that this was an elegant way to advance these two ludicrous talking points by also including the accurate observation that THE WAR WILL SCREW THE 99 PERCENT.

[Dreamer Tatum]

24. Someone got you and I to laugh in unison.

That is a prime indication of something, don't you think?

[woo me with science]

25. +100000

[obxhead]

26. By war hawks I assume you mean solely President Obama.

This war is a unilateral decision he has made.

As for the economy nonsense it must be nice to be in the 1% since things are going so well by your estimates.

[Hutzpa]

27. One thing I've noticed lately on DU is how

the thinking capacity has dwindled immensely. I don't see how you can come to such conclusion that I am part of the 1%? Unbelievable.

[Dreamer Tatum]

28. What a coincidence. I was just thinking an analogous thought. nt

[MFrohike]

29. On what planet and by what measure?

I'm really curious what counts as "bouncing back nicely" these days. New normal, indeed.